Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1967 - NASA's History Office

ASTRONAUTICS AND AERONAUTICS, 1%7 October 7
mid-1967, 346 were military satellites which the Pentagon “proposed
to use . . . for reconnaissance on a so-called real-time scale, followed
by an immediate transmission of information.” Although US. “con-
tinues to persist that its aspirations are the peaceful utilization of
space,” they said, officials “do not hide the fact that NASA builds the
scientific-technological foundation for the development of military-space
facilities . . . [while DOD] finances and controls the planning . . . of
space armament.” (Miles, P Znq, 10/8/67,13C)
October 8: President Johnson addressed International Conference on World
Crisis in Education, Williamsburg, Va.: “. . . I would like to suggest
. . . these challenges: How can we use what we already know about
educational television to accelerate the pace of basic education for all
the children of the world? How can we use modern technology to
economize on that most essential and that most needed educational
resource: the good teacher?” He added: “If future historians . . . seek,
a name for this period in America, I hope they will give consideration
to calling it the age of education. If our children’s children want to
measure what we tried to achieve, I hope they will remember one thing:
The American Government in only 3 years multiplied its commitment
to education and to health four times over. Congress passed more laws
and committed more funds to education and health in the last 3 years
than in all previous history.” (PD, 10/16/67,1419-23)
October 9: Sen. Joseph S. Clark (D-Pa.), member of Senate Foreign Rela-
tions Committee, on Senate floor called proposed Nike-X ABM system
cc
a very expensive flying ‘erector set’ ” and said that Secretary of Defense
Robert S. McNamara was following an unwise course, “militarily,
economically, and diplomatically. . . Even if we were to spend forty
billion dollars or more on a so-called massive system, the resulting
increase in our security would be zero. . . . The result would be a
waste of a great deal of money . . .” at a critical time. He cited three
flaws in arguments supporting ABM system: (1) justification based
on approaching threat of Communist Chinese nuclear tipped missiles
(“We have the capacity to devastate China many times over . . and
the Chinese know that,” he said) ; (2) assumption that a thin ABM
system would be effective against Communist China for any appreciable
period; and (3) assumption that during so-called safe period in Chinese
nuclear development, US., behind an ABM defense, would be genuinely
safe from nuclear attack. “The inevitable conclusion,” Senator Clark
noted, “is that the proposed . . . system simply will not do the job
which its proponents say it will do.” (Text; CR, 10/9/67, S14413-27)
Senate action in voting $4.6 billion for NASA for N 1968 and $142 million
for SST development was criticized by Baltimore Sun: “Approval of
these sums by the Senate underscores, once again, the need for a set
of Federal priorities-for establishing firm control over ‘the course
of fiscal developments,’ as Chairman Mills of the House Ways and
Means Committee put it.” (BSun, 10/9/67)
Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara’s decision to go ahead with
“thin” Nike-X antiballistic missile (ABM) system was criticized by
Sen. Joseph S. Clark (D-Pa.) , member of Senate Foreign Relations
Committee, on floor of Senate: “I urge the administration to reconsider
its decision, which I believe to be wrong on three counts-militarily,
economically, and diplomatically.” He anticipated “resulting increase
in tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union which this
297